DOCSLIB.ORG

Introduction

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Introduction NEL1 9/23/2004 1:21 PM Page 1 Chapter 1 Introduction Lise Nelson and Joni Seager The Poetics of Bodies, Spaces, Place, and Politics my womb a public domain erotica a doormat trampled on by birthright my womb a legislated periphery no longer mine but public space my womb a palestinian front fighting for the right to be a private space “My Womb” by Esmeralda Bernal (reprinted with permission from the publisher of The Americas Review, Houston: Arte Publico Press–University of Houston, 1986) The ideas and materialities woven into Bernal’s poem evoke some of the key insights and sites of feminist geography. Locating her poem within the gendered body, Bernal weaves together the politics of public and private space, the state and nationalism. While no single poem can represent the diverse issues and questions in feminist geog- raphy, the centrality of the body in her poem is significant. Only a few decades after feminists levered “woman” and “gender” into the lexicon of geographic thought, it is “the body” and the multidimensionality of embodied experience(s) that con- tinue to anchor feminist geography at the dawn of the twenty-first century. NEL1 9/23/2004 1:21 PM Page 2 2 LISE NELSON AND JONI SEAGER The body is the touchstone of feminist theory. Within contemporary feminist theory “the body” does not have a single location or scale; rather it is a concept that disrupts naturalized dichotomies and embraces a multiplicity of material and symbolic sites, ones located at the interstices of power exercised under various guises. From the pivotal second-wave feminist understanding that “the personal is political” to the postmodern decentering of a singular notion of gendered experi- ence, feminist theory draws on understandings of embodied experience to funda- mentally challenge bedrocks of Western social and political thought. Feminist geography, anchored in the body, moves across scale, linking the personal and quo- tidian to urban cultural landscapes, deforestation, ethno-nationalist struggles, and global political economies. But what does it mean analytically, theoretically, and methodologically to center the body? What contours define the map of feminist geography? Where is feminism on the map of geography? What do feminist geographers do? This companion to feminist geography approaches these questions by assembling the work of a wide range of contemporary feminist scholars in geography, ones located in Anglo- American as well as global contexts. It examines historiographies of feminist thinking and charts emerging research trajectories that continue to transform not only feminist geography as a field, but the discipline of geography itself. Changing Terrains of Feminist Geography Most chroniclers mark the emergence of feminist geography in North America and the UK in the early 1970s, sparked by movements both within and outside the academy. Within geography, feminist critiques emerged as part of the ferment of “new” radical geographies – especially Marxism – that was raising challenges in the 1970s to the hegemonies of positivistic and corporatist geography (for discussion see Mackenzie, 1984). This was a productive, but also thorny, convergence. The degree of synergy between Marxist and feminist frameworks varied considerably across subfields within the discipline and from country to country; the socialist– feminist intellectual link was much stronger in the UK than in the USA, for example, and remains so today. Clearly feminist geography draws on radical intellectual tra- ditions in the discipline; nevertheless, as feminist geography matured it also served as a corrective – and to some extent as a rebuke – to its radical counterparts which, at least into the 1990s, remained as stubbornly androcentric as mainstream geog- raphy (and in some instances just as openly hostile to feminist approaches). The contested relationship between Marxism and feminism continues to shape epis- temology and intellectual debates within both subfields. From its earliest inception, a defining characteristic of feminist geography was its intellectual cross-fertilization and multidisciplinarity; this remains one of its strengths today. In comparison to other cognate social science fields, geography as a discipline was slower in developing and embracing feminist scholarship; this delayed engagement meant that the critical work already under way in disciplines such as anthropology, sociology, history, political philosophy, and economics was available to the early cohort of geographers who were pioneering feminist geogra- phy. Economist Esther Boserup’s Women’s Role in Economic Development (1970) and Barbara Rogers’s The Domestication of Women (1979), for example, were NEL1 9/23/2004 1:21 PM Page 3 INTRODUCTION 3 instrumental in the emergence of the “women and development” subfield in geog- raphy. Early geographical analyses of women’s perceptions of and relationships to new landscapes drew heavily from then-extant feminist research in historical disci- plines, including key works such as Annette Kolodny’s Lay of the Land (1975). Simi- larly, feminist geographical urban and built-environment research was infused by historical, sociological, and architectural work (including, prominently, now-classics such as Jane Jacobs’s (1961) Death and Life of Great American Cities and Dolores Hayden’s (1984) Redesigning the American Dream). Carol Pateman’s Participation and Democratic Theory (1970) helped inspire feminist geographers interested in gendered divisions between public and private, the state and democracy. The exuberance and vitality of women’s movements outside the academy during the 1970s also strongly influenced the emergence of feminist geography. The women’s liberation movement demanded accountability, visibility, equality. Within feminist geography, this translated first into a project to “add women” to the field, both as producers of knowledge and as subjects of analysis (for discussion see Monk and Hanson, 1982; Mayer, 1989). Starting from the newly legitimated interest in the lives of “real women,” the earliest feminist geographical work focused on mapping (literally and metaphorically) the spatial constraints facing women (for examples see Davies and Fowler, 1971; Hayford, 1974; Tivers, 1977; Ardener, 1981; Seager and Olson, 1986; Seager, 2003; for reviews see Bowlby et al., 1981; Zelinsky et al., 1982). The work of making – and keeping – women’s lives visible is far from complete, and such projects remain at the heart of feminist geography. The efflorescence of feminist geography in the 1980s laid the foundation for many of the subfields and interests that define the contemporary field (for excellent overviews see McDowell, 1992a, b; Domosh, 1999; Longhurst, 2002). In tandem with ground-breaking research on the material realities of women’s lives, feminist geographers in the 1980s adopted and introduced theoretical constructs about the role of gender as an instrumental force and as a category of explanation in geo- graphical processes. Extending work of the previous decade, feminist geographers sought to document and bring into geographical inquiry the analytical significance of gendered spatial divisions between public and private, particularly as they shape work (paid and unpaid), and urban processes (for examples see Christopherson, 1983; Rossini, 1983; Mackenzie, 1986; Nelson, 1986; Pratt and Hanson, 1988). Relatedly, feminist geographers turned to an examination of the spatial and gen- dered dimensions of industrial restructuring, and in the process challenged gendered assumptions within Marxist geography (see Massey, 1984; Murgatroyd et al., 1985). Other scholars sought to make visible women’s roles as actors in built and natural landscapes (for discussion see Monk, 1984). The reverberation of research agendas in the 1980s is still being felt today: fem- inist geographical work in that decade on ecology and social constructions of nature (see, for example, Fitzsimmons, 1989) are at the heart of contemporary work in feminist political ecology. An expanding literature on “women and development” and women’s work in the Global South (see, for example, Momsen and Townsend 1987; Chant and Brydon 1989; Carney and Watts 1990) laid the foundation for a robust subfield, one that today infuses much of the feminist work on globalization and transnational processes. Finally, early feminist forays into political geography (such as Drake and Horton 1983; Peake 1986) led to a 1990 special issue of NEL1 9/23/2004 1:21 PM Page 4 4 LISE NELSON AND JONI SEAGER Political Geography that charted emerging feminist agendas that are still under debate today (Kofman and Peake 1990; see Kofman, chapter 34 in this volume). Key theoretical insights from this period might be summarized by phrases that are now part of our ordinary geographical conventional wisdom: “space is gendered”; “place doesn’t just reflect gender, it produces it”; “sexuality is constructed in place and spatially.” By the 1990s, feminist geographers were actively contributing to broader femi- nist debates that questioned both the unity/singularity of knowledge and the very subject of “woman” that once occupied the central position in feminist thought. While issues such as reproductive rights or the epidemic of violence against women might suggest a unifying gendered experience – perhaps validating a sense of a common “sisterhood” – textured (and textual) analysis of women’s experiences acted out in particular lives and particular places reveals deep cleavages in the notion of what it means to be gendered as a woman.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Emergence of Radical/Critical Geography Within North America
    The Emergence of Radical/Critical Geography within North America Linda Peake1 Urban Studies Program, Department of Social Science York University, Canada [email protected] Eric Sheppard Department of Geography University of California, Los Angeles, USA [email protected] Abstract In this paper we aim to provide a historical account of the evolution of Anglophone radical/critical geography in North America. Our account is structured chronologically. First, we examine the spectral presence of radical / critical geography in North America prior to the mid-sixties. Second, we narrate the emergence of both radical and critical geography between 1964 / 1969 until the mid-1980s, when key decisions were taken that moved radical / critical geography into the mainstream of the discipline. Third, we examine events since the mid- 1980s, as radical geography merged into critical geography, becoming in the process something of a canon in mainstream Anglophone human geography. We conclude that while radical / critical geography has succeeded in its aim of advancing critical geographic theory, it has been less successful in its aim of 1 Published under Creative Commons licence: Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2 Eric’s first exposure was as an undergraduate at Bristol in 1971 when the newly hired lecturer Keith Bassett, freshly returned from Penn State, brought a stack of Antipodes to one of his lectures. Linda’s radical awakening also came in the UK, in the late 1970s courtesy of her lecturers at Reading University. Sophie Bowlby took her The Emergence of Radical/Critical Geography in North America 306 increasing access to the means of knowledge production to become a peoples’ geography that is grounded in a desire for working towards social change.
    [Show full text]
  • Approaches to Human Geography 00-Aitken-3325-Prelims.Qxd 11/24/2005 7:20 PM Page Ii 00-Aitken-3325-Prelims.Qxd 11/24/2005 7:20 PM Page Iii
    00-Aitken-3325-Prelims.qxd 11/24/2005 7:20 PM Page i Approaches to Human Geography 00-Aitken-3325-Prelims.qxd 11/24/2005 7:20 PM Page ii 00-Aitken-3325-Prelims.qxd 11/24/2005 7:20 PM Page iii Approaches to Human Geography Edited by Stuart Aitken and Gill Valentine SAGE Publications London ●●Thousand Oaks New Delhi 00-Aitken-3325-Prelims.qxd 11/24/2005 7:20 PM Page iv Editorial arrangement, part introductions, Chapters 1 and 29 © Stuart Aitken and Gill Valentine 2006 Chapter 2 © Rob Kitchin 2006 Chapter 14 © David Ley 2006 Chapter 3 © J. Nicholas Entrikin and Chapter 15 © David Harvey 2006 John H.Tepple 2006 Chapter 16 © Robin A. Kearns 2006 Chapter 4 © Deborah P.Dixon and Chapter 17 © Vera Chouinard 2006 John Paul Jones III 2006 Chapter 18 © Linda McDowell 2006 Chapter 5 © George Henderson and Eric Chapter 19 © Richa Nagar 2006 Sheppard 2006 Chapter 20 © Lawrence Knopp 2006 Chapter 6 © Reginald G. Golledge 2006 Chapter 21 © Janice Monk 2006 Chapter 7 © Isabel Dyck and Chapter 22 © A. Stewart Fotheringham 2006 Robin A. Kearns 2006 Chapter 23 © Michael F.Goodchild 2006 Chapter 8 © Andrew Sayer 2006 Chapter 24 © Paul Rodaway 2006 Chapter 9 © David B. Clarke 2006 Chapter 25 © Michael Samers 2006 Chapter 10 © Paul Harrison 2006 Chapter 26 © Kim England 2006 Chapter 11 © Fernando J. Bosco 2006 Chapter 27 © John W. Wylie 2006 Chapter 12 © Clive Barnett 2006 Chapter 28 © Paul Robbins 2006 Chapter 13 © Gerard Rushton 2006 First published 2006 Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, this publication may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any form, or by any means, only with the prior permission in writing of the publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction, in accordance with the terms of licences issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency.
    [Show full text]
  • Marxism and Geography in the Anglophone World
    Essay Neil Smith Marxism and Geography in the Anglophone World In October 1997 an article appeared in the impeccably bourgeois magazine, the New Yorker, which championed Karl Marx as the “next new thinker”. Down on Wall Street, wrote John Cassidy, there is a new appreciation for Marx’s understanding of capitalism, and a sense that Marx anticipated brilliantly what so-called globalization was all about th (Cassidy 1997). The impending 150 anniversary of The Communist Manifesto intensified the clamour. As Marx and Engels famously wrote there, the bourgeoisie “creates a world after its own image”, and so with the dragon of international socialism apparently slain after 1989, despite local holdouts in Cuba and North Korea, and with Marx no longer the demon of capital, expectant young Wall Street financiers could embrace Marx’s vivid depiction of capitalism as a remarkably prescient portrait of the neo-liberal global order they themselves strove to create. Marx had brilliantly anticipated globalization, and Wall Street thought it was a good thing. But the “Marx boom” of 1997-98 quickly fizzled as capitalism itself turned sour. The Asian economic crisis exploded, Indonesia’s Suharto was overthrown in a deadly revolt, and the economic malaise spread to Brazil, Mexico and Russia. Marx, it seemed, still had a sting in his tail. Reading Das Kapital to understand how capitalism really worked was one thing. But the same Das Kapital also seemed to teach that economic depression was endemic to capitalism, the stock market was a giant swindle, the Asian economic crisis – rooted in overproduction in Thailand and generalized into the region’s currency and security markets – was a classic capitalist crisis, and that political struggle is equally endemic to capitalism.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Materialism and Marxism 51 Don Mitchell 6 Feminisms 66 Joanne Sharp 7 Poststructuralism 79 Deborah P
    Part II Theoretical Intersections 5 Historical Materialism and Marxism 51 Don Mitchell 6 Feminisms 66 Joanne Sharp 7 Poststructuralism 79 Deborah P. Dixon and John Paul Jones III 8 Psychoanalytic Approaches 108 Paul Kingsbury 9 Performativity: A Geography of Unknown Lands 121 Nigel Thrift Chapter 5 Historical Materialism and Marxism Don Mitchell Historical Materialism offers to study social process in its totality; that is, it offers to do this when it appears, not as another “sectoral” history – as economic, political, intellec- tual history, as history of labour, or as “social history” defined as yet another sector – but as a total history of society, in which all other histories are convened. E. P. Thompson (1978: 70) The first sustained attempt to develop historical materialism within cultural geog- raphy was by Denis Cosgrove.1 Cosgrove (1983: 1) argued that “[b]oth Marxism and cultural geography commence at the same ontological point.” Both “insist on characterizing the relationship between humans and nature as historical.” But his- torical materialism differs from cultural geography by also insisting that humans “make their own history and themselves.” Cosgrove argued that culture was best understood as “the production and reproduction of material life [as] necessarily a collective art, mediated in consciousness and sustained through modes of commu- nication,” and that cultural geographers needed to come to terms with the key debates that animated historical-materialist and Marxist theories of determination. Historical Materialism . The general philosophical position of materialism begins from the fundamental assertion that “matter” is the “primary substance of all living and non-living things” (Williams 1983: 197).
    [Show full text]
  • Gentrification and the Ethics of Home Katherine Joanne Nopper
    † Designated as an Exemplary Final Project for 2017-18 Gentrification and the Ethics of Home Katherine Joanne Nopper Faculty Advisor: Joseph Richard Winters Religious Studies African and African American Studies April 2018 This project was submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the Graduate Liberal Studies Program in the Graduate School of Duke University. Copyright by Katherine Joanne Nopper 2018 Abstract Gentrification is the subject of a recent wave of books and scholarship, continuing debates regarding the responsibilities of the “gentrifiers” and the impact of gentrifying landscapes on marginalized communities. This project looks in a different direction, using a multi-media approach to investigate the ethics of home in relation to aesthetics, architecture, capitalism and the culture industry. Strongly informed by the critical thought of Theodor Adorno, five essays bring multiple disciplines and theories together: Marxist geography (David Harvey, Neil Smith), architecture (Sarah Goldhagen, Lester Walker), philosophy and history (Walter Benjamin, Adorno), African American literature (Octavia Butler, Toni Morrison, Pauli Murray), and decolonial literature and thought (Ousmane Sembène, Franz Fanon, Aimé Césaire). Incorporating citations and literary passages, as well as the author’s own photography and linocut prints, the project images the contradictions inherent in the idea of home and emphasizes the impossibility of living an ethical life under capitalism. iii Contents Introduction………………………………...………………………………….1 Chapter One: Accumulation………………………………………………………....7 Chapter Two: Environment…………………………………...……………………30 Chapter Three: Proximity…………………………………………………….52 Chapter Four: Fetish…………………………………………………….……67 Chapter Five: Gentrifier…………………………………………………..….90 Bibliography…………………………………………………..……………103 iv Acknowledgments In my first weeks at Duke I was fortunate to meet my advisor, recognizing even then that my studies here would be profoundly influenced by our conversations and his enthusiasm.
    [Show full text]
  • International Geographical Union Commission on Gender and Geography
    INTERNATIONAL GEOGRAPHICAL UNION COMMISSION ON GENDER AND GEOGRAPHY Newsletter No. 55 November, 2015 From the Commission Chair Shirlena Huang, National University of Singapore The key event for the Commission since my last message was the 2015 IGU Regional Conference in Moscow on 7-21 August. Held at the imposing buildings of the Lomonosov Moscow State University (LMSU), the papers focused around the overall theme of “Geography, Culture and Society for Our Future Earth”. Our Commission organized 5 sessions, including two co-sponsored with other Commissions and each with 3-5 papers. Themes were: • Gendered Crime and Spaces • Factors Affecting Women’s Education: Gender, Space, Culture and Society • Gendered Life Courses • Gendered Activisms in Asia (co-organised with the Commission on Political Geography) • The Geographies of International Student Migration (co-organised with the Population Geography Commission) In addition, I had the honour of presenting a Plenary Lecture on behalf of the Commission as Recipient of the Inaugural IGU Award for Best Commission which we received in 2014. The paper, “A Continuing Agenda for Gender”, was a collaborative effort by Janet Momsen, Janice Monk, Maria Dolors Garcia Ramon, Joos Droogleever Fortuijn and myself. It discussed the challenges faced by and contributions of the Commission over its 27-year history, and also considered the role the Commission can continue to play in the future. The IGU Gender and Geography Commission has come a long way since it was first established as a Study Group at the 1988 IGU Congress in Sydney – not without some struggles given that gender was not then acknowledged by all geographers as an area worthy of geographical research.
    [Show full text]
  • Neil Smith, 1954-2012: Radical Geography, Marxist Geographer, Revolutionary Geographer
    1 Neil Smith, 1954-2012: Radical Geography, Marxist Geographer, Revolutionary Geographer Don Mitchell Department of Geography, Syracuse University and Advanced Research Collaborative, Graduate Center City University of New York September 29, 2013 "Although we found it easy to be brilliant, we always found it confusing to be good." Salman Rushdie, Midnight's Children (quotation found pinned to the bulletin board in Neil Smith’s study when passed away) Neil Smith hated hagiography. He would rail against it in his history and theory of geography seminars at Rutgers University in the early 1990s, holding up what he thought were particularly egregious examples: obituaries published in the Annals. Hagiography for Neil was the antithesis of what our disciplinary history ought to be: it was uncritical and celebratory, when what were needed were hard-nosed engagements with ideas, with real histories that understood ideas as the product of struggle and error as well as genius and insight. Even worse, hagiography extracted its subject from history, setting him (usually him) apart from the world as a lone genius rather than fully ensconcing him in messy social (and personal) practices, situating ideas within the social (and personal) histories from which they emerged. Hagiography had little room to show how what was genius in someone’s ideas might be inextricably linked to, indeed very much a function of both social context and what was flawed or less savory in that person. Hagiography denies that ideas are embodied. Neil’s ideas were embodied. 2 Indeed, David Harvey calls Neil “the perfect practicing Marxist – completely defined by his contradictions.”1 Born in Leith, the old port of Edinburgh, and raised one of four children of a school teaching father and homemaking mother in Dalkeith, a small working-class town to the southeast of the city, Neil had an indestructible passion for the natural world, starting with his native Midlothian landscape and quickly spiraling out, for birdwatching, and for gardening, and he became geography’s preeminent urban theorist.
    [Show full text]
  • Abstract Geographies of Neoliberal Regulation And
    ABSTRACT GEOGRAPHIES OF NEOLIBERAL REGULATION AND THE EVERYDAY URBAN EXPERIENCE: A CASE STUDY OF OVER-THE-RHINE, CINCINNATI Jean-Paul David Addie This thesis analyses the impacts of neoliberal urbanism through conducting a qualitative case study of the inner-city neighbourhood of Over-the-Rhine, Cincinnati. Drawing upon the geographic concept of 'actually existing' neoliberalism, combined with in-depth interviews with neighbourhood organisations, community advocacy groups and residents in Over-the-Rhine, I explore the complex, often contradictory and dialectical relationships between neoliberal regulatory-institutional restructuring, the production of urban space, and the practices of everyday life. Played out against a background of racial tension and civil unrest, the creation of a new, neoliberal institutional landscape in Over-the-Rhine politically and economically disenfranchises the most marginalised neighbourhood inhabitants through re-articulating urban and political space, and re-imagining the ideological form and function of the inner city and the urban poor. I assert the significance of place-based studies to explore the place-specific articulations of neoliberal urbanism and in doing so, present directions for future research. GEOGRAPHIES OF NEOLIBERAL REGULATION AND THE EVERYDAY URBAN EXPERIENCE: A CASE STUDY OF OVER-THE-RHINE, CINCINNATI A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Miami University in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Department of Geography by Jean-Paul David Addie Miami University
    [Show full text]
  • GEO 603 Development of Geographic Thought Fall 2020
    GEO 603 Development of Geographic Thought Fall 2020 Bob Wilson Department of Geography Monday, 2:15-5:00pm Eggers 155 Office: Eggers 533 Email: [email protected] Office Hours: Happy to meet with students via Zoom (email me to make an appointment) Overview This graduate seminar examines the development of geographic thought and changes in the discipline of geography from the early twentieth century to the present. It focuses on continuities in geographic thought over that time—the reoccurring debates and issues that geographers have wrestled with for decades. But the seminar also addresses discontinuities—the profound methodological and conceptual changes throughout the discipline’s twentieth and twenty-first century histories. As David Livingstone wrote, geography has always been a contested enterprise. This seminar will help you better understand what ideas geographers contested and what was at stake in past and current debates. While this class will give you a firmer conceptual grounding for your MA or PhD research in geography and other disciplines, it will also to help you better understand the approaches of other geographers. Geography is a broad discipline that includes perspectives from the social sciences, natural sciences, and the humanities. You are probably already developing expertise in one of these three broad areas. In this course, you will need to do your best to understand how geographers using conceptual and methodological approaches far different from your own make sense of the world. Evaluation 30% Seminar Attendance, Participation, and Leading/Fostering Discussion 20% Response Papers (4) 50% Final Seminar Paper about Sub-Field in Geography Seminar Attendance, Participation, and Leading Discussion (30%) Students are expected to attend all classes and come ready to participate in class discussions.
    [Show full text]
  • Pluralizing Labor Geography Jamie Peck Introduction
    Pluralizing labor geography Jamie Peck Forthcoming in GL Clark, MP Feldman, MS Gertler & D Wójcik (eds) The New Oxford handbook of economic geography. Oxford: Oxford University Press Introduction: constructions of labor geography There are few issues that illustrate the differences between the generally heterodox field of economic geography and the more orthodox world of geographical Economics than the treatment of labor. In orthodox terms, labor principally appears as an abstraction, traded on labor markets at a price, the wage, which in turn is taken as a measure of human-capital endowments and the balance of supply and demand. In contrast, once economic geographers opened up the black box of the production function, starting after the late 1970s to venture into the workplace itself, labor would no longer be seen as a disembodied “factor” of production. Having begun to pose the “labor question,” economic geographers soon found themselves on the terrain of class and gender relations; they were dealing with politics and institutions, with industrial disputes, and more. This was the beginning of “labor geography,” the non-linear trajectories and shifting concerns of which are the focus of this chapter. Necessarily selective, the chapter cuts a path through a variegated and evolving body of work that amongst other things has mapped the shifting politics of production, together with old and new forms of labor organization; that has problematized the workplace, as a site of struggle and as a place for the performance and (re)production of social identities; that has tracked the restructuring of labor markets, as spaces of socioinstitutional stress and regulatory transformation; and that has utilized labor (and labor relations) as a diagnostic, as the key to understanding different (local) varieties of capitalism, economies of care and reproduction, and alternative modes of socioeconomic organization.
    [Show full text]
  • Vita, Nancy Ettlinger
    CV, NANCY ETTLINGER Contact Information Department of Geography 1036 Derby Hall 154 North Oval Mall office tel.: (614) 292-2573 Ohio State University e-mail: [email protected] Columbus, Ohio 43210-1361 fax: (614) 292-6213 Education Ph.D., 1984 Geography, University of Oklahoma M.A., 1980 Geography, University of Oklahoma B.A., 1977 Anthropology, Hamilton College, Clinton NY Current and Past Positions 2015-present Professor, Department of Geography, Ohio State University 2006-present Associate Faculty, Department of Comparative Studies, Ohio State University 2001-present Associate Faculty, Women’s Studies, Ohio State University 1993-2015 Associate Professor, tenured, Department of Geography, Ohio State University 1988-1993 Assistant Professor, tenure-track, Department of Geography, Ohio State University 1987-1988 Courtesy appointment, Assistant Professor, Department of Economics, University of Nebraska 1985-1988 Temporary Assistant Professor, Department of Geography, University of Nebraska 1984-1985 Visiting Assistant Professor, Department of Geography, University of Connecticut General Research Interests critical human geography poststuctural theory and epistemology governance of neoliberal life culture and economy systems of production, consumption and social in/justice critical health studies segregation radical democracy networks Peer-Reviewed Journal Publications Ettlinger, N. and Hartmann, C. 2015. Post/neo/liberalism in relational perspective. Political Geography 48: 37-48. Ettlinger, N. 2014. The openness paradigm. New Left Review 89: 89-100. Ettlinger, N. 2014. Delivering on poststructural ontologies: epistemological challenges and strategies. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies 13: 589-598. CV, Ettlinger, June 2015 2 Ettlinger, N. 2013. The production of precariousness and implications for collective action: a reply to Emiliana Armano and Annalisa Murgia.
    [Show full text]
  • Ernste, H. (2008) Critical Geography in Post-Modern Times. In
    1 Critical geography in post-modern times Huib Ernste1 Abstract This contribution is dedicated to Associate Prof. dr. Ton van Naerssen - a highly esteemed member of the Department of Human Geography at the Radboud University Nijmegen who is retiring this year. He became a member of the department during the turbulent early seventies (1973), as a strong representative of, at that time, the emerging radical and critical geography approach which focussed on creating a better world, especially for those in developing countries. During the many years that he continued his research at the department and educated many new young scholars, he also experienced the turn of the tide from the ‘classical’, mainly Marxist inspired radical approach, towards the critical approach of today which is much more inspired by post-structural thinking. In this contribution I will try to look back at these developments and changes, and try to ask myself how one can still be critical today? 1. Introduction Many young academics, having their first research experiences in the field of human geography, often struggle with finding a suitable theoretic framework for their research. One part of this struggle is the ambition to make their research matter in a practical, societal context (Massey, 1984). How can one derive practically and politically relevant conclusions from one’s own research? From this perspective, it often does not seem to be enough to just understand current practices. It is also felt as a necessity to make some kind of recommendations for change to create a better future, or at least have the feeling that one’s research leads to something.
    [Show full text]